An analysis about a generic desktop application configuration management system
p.kaluza at tu-bs.de
Tue Apr 12 04:16:04 EEST 2005
Patrick Patterson wrote:
>On Monday 11 April 2005 20:42, P. Kaluza wrote:
>>So i _suggest_ (as others have before me) to adopt DBUS as the protocol
>>for all client<->first-tier-server.
>Why bother at this point? Let's do like every other standards body before us,
>and define what the protocol looks like, and ignore the transport of that
>protocol - it may be that D-BUS is the right way to go, but there could be an
>argument made for DCOP, and straight up Unix Domain Sockets.
Well, the idea basically was to know if protocoll ideas should be
proposed and discussed in the form of function calls or of ASCII command
strings (think IMAP). Although, now that i think about it, it would be
possible to converse between the two. A bit non-trivial when it comes to
async calls, though. :-)
I'd say let's assume we'll use some kind of RPC and discuss the ideas in
function form for a start.
More information about the xdg